Re: Proposal - Amendment - allow hardware support from non-free into the debian system
Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>
> Well, i think we are going to have too many options on that ballot, i think we
> should do some rationalizing at some point, and keep only a few which will
> represent most opinions, and work on polishing their wordings instead of
> everyone proposing their pet proposal.
I agree, but it's probably inevitable because Steve Langasek made
this a compound proposal, mixing issues, and there are many different
combinations which would resolve it. Also, our voting is clone-proof,
so hopefully it won't damage the chances of finding the best possible
solution. Even so, this option is quite different to the others so far.
[...]
> Why do you mention the admin section of the non-free archive ? I mean,
> sections are mostly obsolet with the new pool structure, and it is not clear
> what is meant here.
I mean packages with a Section: control field of non-free/admin. Even if
it's mostly obsolete, ftpmasters and others are still regulating it, yes?
> If this is clarified, i would second your proposal.
Hope that's sufficient clarification. Would you second it whether or not I
drop the word 'vital' from it?
[...]
> Notice that the split to non-free will no more happen for etch, i think it is
> doubtful that any other issue will come of those GRs.
Not 100% sure what you mean, but I think this has changed recently and I hope
it's not set in stone.
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: